The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.

From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."

?php
>

Thursday, November 12, 2015

Netanyahu Treads Lightly - Joseph Klein

by Joseph Klein

The Israeli Prime Minister attempts to repair relations with Obama -- and faces hatred from the Left.

President Barack Obama and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met at the White House on November 9th for two-and-a-half hours, their first face-to-face meeting in more than a year.

While their body language did not exactly exude warmth between the two
leaders, they were said by officials on both sides to have conducted a
“businesslike” and “cordial” meeting. If so, any such cordiality on Obama’s part would be a first,
considering the long pattern of public disparagement of Netanyahu by
members of Obama’s administration and by the president himself.

Whatever personal animus Obama still has for Netanyahu, the president
kept it inside and put on his game face for the summit meeting. In his
introductory public remarks before the summit meeting, President Obama
condemned the Palestinian campaign of violence against “innocent Israeli
citizens” and acknowledged that Israel “has not just the right, but the
obligation to protect itself.” Missing from his statement were his
usual expression of moral equivalence and calls for Israel not to
retaliate with disproportionate force. Obama was also careful to stay
away from the settlements issue that had sparked tension between the two
leaders early in Obama’s first term. Obama chose to restrain himself
this time from stressing his differences with Israeli policies on
sensitive issues.

Prime Minister Netanyahu reciprocated,
thanking President Obama “for sustaining and strengthening the
tremendous friendship and alliance between Israel and the United States
of America.” The prime minister’s statement that “I remain committed to a
vision of peace of two states for two peoples” was no doubt meant to
placate his host, even though Obama has all but given up trying to
achieve that vision during his presidency.

President Obama
did allude in his pre-meeting remarks to the much publicized differences
with Prime Minister Netanyahu over what the president described as the
“narrow” issue of the Iran nuclear agreement. However, trying to put to
rest the issue that has caused the most contention between the leaders
during their common time in office, Obama emphasized their shared goals
in countering Iranian aggression, keeping Iran from obtaining a nuclear
weapon and curbing violent extremism in the region.

For his
part, Prime Minister Netanyahu steered clear of the Iranian nuclear deal
altogether in his public remarks before the summit meeting. Instead,
the prime minister focused on the positive. He thanked Obama “for your
commitment to further bolstering Israel’s security” and for engaging in
“how to bolster Israel’s security, how to maintain Israel’s qualitative
military edge so that Israel can, as you’ve often said, defend itself,
by itself, against any threat.”

After admitting the obvious
that “the security environment in the Middle East has deteriorated in
many areas,” Obama declared “the security of Israel is one of my top
foreign policy priorities.” The summit helped kick off discussions to
advance negotiation of the terms of a new 10 year memorandum of
understanding on U.S. military assistance to replace the current one
that expires in 2017. While apparently no commitments were made
regarding specific dollar amounts of enhanced aid, Obama reportedly told
Netanyahu during the meeting that he was sending high level officials
to Israel next month to work on the terms of such a security agreement.

It is in both leaders’ interest at this time to demonstrate publicly
that they have much more in common than any differences between them.
President Obama is trying to convince the mainstream Jewish-American
electorate that he – and by extension the Democratic Party – can be
entrusted to look after Israel’s vital interests. He also may be hedging
his bets, as he sees Iran remaining as belligerent as ever and
cementing its alliance with Russia in Syria, while Sunni Arab states
back away from his anti-ISIS coalition. The Syrian conflict, including
the war on ISIS and Russia’s military involvement, were reportedly among
the major topics of discussion.

Prime Minister Netanyahu
does not want to further alienate President Obama to the point that
Obama decides not to protect Israel diplomatically at the United
Nations, with a veto if necessary, the next time the Palestinians try to
push the Security Council to pass a pro-Palestinian resolution. The
prime minister is also adopting a conciliatory approach in order to
blunt criticism at home that he has unnecessarily damaged relations with
Israel’s most important ally as a result of the bellicose language he
has used in the past. And he is trying to prevent a serious rupture in
the Jewish-American community where disagreements with Netanyahu’s past
statements and policies have surfaced. Thus, on the issue of Iran, for
example, Netanyahu made it clear in his speech to the general assembly
of the Jewish Federations of North America the day after the summit
meeting that he has basically accepted the nuclear deal with Iran as a
fait accompli. “I believe that America and Israel can and should work
together now to ensure that Iran complies with the deal, to curb Iran’s
regional aggression and to fight Iranian terrorism around the world,” he
said.

Prime Minister Netanyahu is also using his Washington
visit to try and restore the level of bipartisan support for Israel in
Congress that had existed prior to the brouhaha over Iran. Continuation
of significant U.S. support for Israel’s defense is at stake. “Yesterday
I had a wonderful discussion with President Obama about how to secure
that assistance for the coming decade,” Netanyahu told the Jewish
Federations of North America audience. He hopes Congress is listening.

To cover both ends of the American political spectrum, the prime
minister met with the conservative American Enterprise Institute to
receive the 2015 Irving Kristol Award and has reached out to engage in a
dialogue with the Center for American Progress
(CAP). This organization can be especially important in repairing
Israel’s bridges to Democrats, both in Congress and among opinion
makers. CAP’s leaders extended the invitation, although there was
internal dissension within the ranks. Several CAP employees strongly
criticized the decision to extend the invitation, reading a joint
statement of opposition at an internal meeting last week.

CAP’s announcement described the event as “a conversation with Israeli
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on a range of issues, including Iran,
Israeli-Palestinian relations, regional concerns, and ways to strengthen
the partnership between Israel and the United States.”

The
Israeli prime minister did not simply give a speech at CAP’s
headquarters and then duck out. He responded to questions from the
moderator and the audience with a candid discussion of such matters as
prospects for peace with the Palestinians and the handling of
settlements and settler violence. He said that he remained willing to
sit down with Palestinian Authority President Abbas anytime without
conditions. He half-jokingly suggested to the moderator that she invite
Abbas to the CAP forum as well so that such negotiations could start to
take place. Netanyahu said that the settlements issue could be solved
rather easily and, to put the issue in perspective, pointed out that
Palestinian attacks on Jews in the region went as far back as the 1920’s
before there was an Israeli state. He noted that a viable two-state
solution required mutual recognition including the Palestinians’
acceptance of a Jewish state that would not be flooded by millions of
Palestinian “refugees” seeking to “return” to areas within pre-1967
Israel. It also required guarantees that Israel would maintain control
of security in ceded territory to avoid a replication of the Gaza
debacle.

It should be noted that CAP’s President Neera Tanden
served as Hillary Clinton’s policy advisor in her 2008 presidential
campaign. The Center for American Progress was once described as “the
official Hillary Clinton think tank.” Tanden may well be trying to use
CAP’s progressive credentials to give Hillary political cover with
hard-left Democrats disenchanted with Netanyahu. This would help shore
up Hillary’s leftist base as she also reaches out to Jewish voters more
favorably disposed towards Netanyahu with her promise that she would
invite Netanyahu to the White House “in my first month in office.”

However, whatever their motive, CAP at least stood firm in defending
the value of free exchange of ideas and points of view against militant
calls for censorship by members of the intolerant Left. CAP’s leaders
had to fight off anti-Israel radicals who tried to get CAP to cancel
Prime Minister Netanyahu’s event with CAP. As CAP President Tanden
explained, “There is a progressive value to have an open discourse on
important topics of the day. It was not an easy decision but at end of
day we are a think tank. He’s the leader of a country with which the US
has a very strong relationship. There are issues we care about in Israel
and the region. So we agreed to hold a forum."

A letter to the Center for American Progress, circulated by Jewish Voice for Peace and the Arab American Institute
and signed by a bevy of far-left organizations and individuals
describing themselves as “progressives,” accused Prime Minister
Netanyahu of “attempting to repackage his increasingly far-right agenda
as bi-partisan consensus.” The signers said they were “dismayed that CAP
will sponsor an address by Netanyahu on November 10th” and that “CAP should not be providing him with this opportunity.”

Their efforts failed to stop the event. Prime Minister Netanyahu calmly
explained Israel’s position on a number of delicate issues. While not
greeted with the kind of enthusiastic applause he is used to receiving
in more friendly settings, he at least was accorded a respectful
hearing.

Prime Minister Netanyahu’s whirlwind visit to
Washington has succeeded in helping to restore bipartisan consensus in
support of Israel’s legitimate security needs. The hard Left’s efforts
to delegitimize the Jewish state of Israel and paint its leaders as
racists took a beating in this round at least.